Author
Topic: Valkyria: Azure Revolution

Media Vision is a good RPG developer. I just get the feeling that they thought they were going to make just another VC game (you know like VC3). It wouldn't shock me if Sega stopped whatever game MV was making in pre-mid production and proclaimed that they now wanted an action RPG, with dinosaur tanks! and Gothlolis! The whole thing just looks rushed and that they wanted to get it out as fast and as quietly as possible to avoid any long term damage.

Media Vision is a good RPG developer. I just get the feeling that they thought they were going to make just another VC game (you know like VC3). It wouldn't shock me if Sega stopped whatever game MV was making in pre-mid production and proclaimed that they now wanted an action RPG, with dinosaur tanks! and Gothlolis! The whole thing just looks rushed and that they wanted to get it out as fast and as quietly as possible to avoid any long term damage.

Knowing that Media Vision was involved explains so much about those tanks. *cough*Nuclear Dragons*cough*

Actually, I suspect that MV just wanted to make Valkyria ARMs (nah, too conspicuous, let's go with Wild Chronicles), but the fanbase wanted a second good Valkyria Chronicles game instead, and even after that revision they did midway through, I feel that they never quite got to the point where they could've replicated the VC formula (such as it is).

And you know, I kinda feel like we dodged a bullet by never getting a follow-up to Skies of Arcadia. If Sega simply cannot do a VC follow-up competently, imagine what they would've done with a SoA follow-up (no more Airship battles for you matey, as everything gets increasingly generic JRPG setting).

Are they? I guess I have to give them some points because they're listed as the dev on VC3. On the other hand VC3 has so much carried over from VC2 (engine, assets, etc.) which was an internal Sega project so I don't know how much of that was really Media Vision's work...

But the last Media Vision game I played was Shining Resonance which was also a turd sandwich. Perhaps not as bad as this game, but it certainly wasn't good.

Are they? I guess I have to give them some points because they're listed as the dev on VC3. On the other hand VC3 has so much carried over from VC2 (engine, assets, etc.) which was an internal Sega project so I don't know how much of that was really Media Vision's work...

But the last Media Vision game I played was Shining Resonance which was also a turd sandwich. Perhaps not as bad as this game, but it certainly wasn't good.

They've made a couple stinkers (Shining games) and I can't say I've played their (arguably) best game VC3. However yea they are a solid game developer. Digimon: CS was excellent, so was Wild Arms 3.

Edit: Just to be clear, the game has been out long enough for a consensus to be formed. The consensus is that it is bad. While there are certainly some people that at least claim to like it, they are in the minority.

And you know, I kinda feel like we dodged a bullet by never getting a follow-up to Skies of Arcadia. If Sega simply cannot do a VC follow-up competently, imagine what they would've done with a SoA follow-up (no more Airship battles for you matey, as everything gets increasingly generic JRPG setting).

In 2018 Sega announces the FPS you always wanted: Skies of Arcadia II: No More Sky

Edit: Just to be clear, the game has been out long enough for a consensus to be formed. The consensus is that it is bad. While there are certainly some people that at least claim to like it, they are in the minority.

Yeah well some people were giving Ever Oasis a 5/10, does that stop me from wanting to play it? Not really.

I'm also starting to become very suspicious of "video game players" and "reviewers" in general... a very strong feeling they aren't actually playing these things.

Or like game conventions, these people dress up as these characters and I'm like.. you haven't actually played FFXV have you? lol..

Logged

"I don't live by labels, I can be anything I want, I'd rather die a pauper than live on as someone else's fantasy!" - My best attempt at quoting the protagonist of Vandal Hearts 2.

Hey arti has a bit of a point. Sometimes the rants and freakout reviews about how bad a game is are almost entirely based on a fucking demo or one area the reviewer has played. Worse yet, a lot of review sites like the shock reviews for traffic. Can't blame him/her for being skeptical...

Course, Ranadiel's opinion being less of a bullshit reviewer and more of a buddy should actually hold some merit for your judgment rather than just being some dude who's paid by the line written.

I started to play this game and it is not bad. I enjoy it, maybe because I have not played action RPG for a long time. It is nice change after completing turn based Grand Kingdom. Here are some points:- graphics (especially faces) are a bit outdated, but I can live with that- beautiful soundtrack- story is interesting. A bit predictable, but worth it- too many loading screens at the beginning. It gets better later (longer scenes).- simple action RPG battle system. Ranged combat is limited, but there are plenty ragnite skills.- j voice acting